Is the Sony SAL50F18 the sharpest 50mm?

[fast_primes]

<p><br /> With the possible exceptions of the Leica RF 50s and the Olympus 4/3 format 50mm F2.0 macro, the new Sony 50mm F1.8 may be the sharpest 50mm currently available. Or rather--it should be! How? By<em><strong> not</strong> </em> pursuing full frame 35mm coverage Sony gave it's optical engineers a much easier target. That, along with modern design (including an ED glass element I believe) they designed a lens that should easily beat the old full frame Canon and Nikon 50F1.8 lenses, along with the old Minolta 50F1.7 lens as well!<br /> <br /> My only quibble, is that Sony <em><strong>should</strong> </em> have made a 35mm F1.8 and a 70mm F1.8--thus offering the classic 50mm and 105mm full frame equivalents to their users! This would have generated a<em><strong> great deal </strong> </em> of outside interest in the Sony system. I believe people are literally <em><strong>starved </strong> </em> for high quality (<em><strong>and </strong> </em> low weight/low cost) APS-C format primes. Note the fact that the Nikon 35F1.8 DX (a APS-C format only lens that also outperforms the older FF 35F2.0 FX lens) has been sold out/out-of-stock at Adorama and B&H for most of the time since it's introduction way back in March! People were choosing the 50mm (a 75mm full frame equivalent when used on APS-C format) because they had <em><strong>no</strong> </em> choice! <br /> <br /> Still, Sony deserves considerable praise for bringing out the SAL50F18 and the accompanying 30mm SAL30M28 macro (which could also be thought of as a super sharp APS-C format normal lens)! Are there any more APS-C primes in the queue?<br /> <br /> FP--a Nikon 35F1.8 DX user who's also waiting to see what the Samsung NX system will offer.</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>"By<em><strong> not</strong> </em> pursuing full frame 35mm coverage Sony gave it's optical engineers a much easier target. That, along with modern design (including an ED glass element I believe) they designed a lens that should easily beat the old full frame Canon and Nikon 50F1.8 lenses, along with the old <a href="../sony-minolta-slr-system-forum/00UTHu?unified_p=1#" target="_blank" >Minolta<img src="http://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/2.gif" alt="" /> </a> 50F1.7 lens as well!"</p>

<p>Perhaps you should buy a p&s since you are of the opinion that smaller is better.</p>

[paul_de_ley]

<p>Aside from all the issues with sharpness depending on aperture, aren't the major brand 50mm macros/micros designed to be slightly sharper than their standard 50mm counterparts, and isn't that why the latter are actually recommended more for portrait work than the former?</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>Isnt 50mm that is super sharp from wide open just boring?</p>

<p>50mm DT doesnt make any sense to me. 58-60mm f1.8 would have made more sense. We may not have a 35 f1.8, but we do have a 30 f2.8 macro... its aimed at p&s converts to me, but its still sounds like a very handy lens to have with you.</p>

[fast_primes]

<p>I found a review here:<br>

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1273/cat/82<br>

But it looks like we'll have to wait for a more thorough dpreview or pop photo, before we can get any more extensive performance details of the 50F1.8.</p>

 

[jiun_der_chung]

<blockquote>

<p>Isnt 50mm that is super sharp from wide open just boring?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is just such a funny comment. Maybe you could smear some vaseline onto the lens to soften it up and make it a little less boring.</p>

<p>Actually as I have already commented on before, primes for APS makes no sense to me at all. It doesn't cost much more to get a high quality prime for FF and FF DSLRs are becoming cheaper all the time. After all, DSLR bodies are for today but decent glass is forever. (Ok maybe not forever but for a heck of a lot longer than a DSLR body).</p>

[alanbrowne]

<p>I would bet the Nikon is sharper, but it has hideous bokeh.<br>

The Leica's blow away everyone from wide open to f/16 and perhaps smaller.<br>

The Minolta/Sony is soft wide open, though it can produce sharp images at f/3.5 or so.<br>

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6168907&size=lg<br>

Using it for say, product photos is useless as the perspective distortion is plain awful (can be done with great care).<br>

The 50 f/1.7 - f/1.8 is a very simple and basic lens - all OEM's have very good examples of it. Really nothing to make too much hay of.</p>

[alanbrowne]

<p>Regarding your desire for very high quality APS-C fixed-focal-length lenses, I sincerely hope that Sony do not hear you.<br>

I desire high quality full frame FFL lenses and that's where I hope Sony, Tamron and Carl Zeiss focus their efforts.<br>

When K-M came out with the 7D, I bought one and bought a couple more lenses - always making sure they were full frame as I still shot film (Maxxum 9) and was pretty sure that Nikon would need a FF sensor and that Sony would provided it to them. From there the possibility that a full frame K-M might come out was less than a fantasy. As soon as I saw the huge prism box on the 'outing' of the new high end Sony I was sure it would be FF.<br>

As time goes on, FF will become more the norm than the exception amongst serious amateur/enthusiasts and pros using the Sony system - being caught with cropped lenses will seem at least unfortunate to those owners.</p>

[fast_primes]

<p>I need to add that the slrgear.com test <em><strong>is pretty thorough</strong></em>! Moreover they offer quite a few test primes and zooms across all the major brands. Worth checking out. <br>

Richard, I agree that a 58mm or 60mm would have made more sense in a traditional sense. That was my point also, except that I would prefer the still longer length of 70mm. And the upcoming 30mm macro may indeed by an excellent lens also. We'll see. </p>